<>. 


%^ 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


^ 


/ 


o 


:/. 


V 


^ 


//, 


* 


1.0 


I.I 


6" 


Aotographic 

Sciences 

Corporation 


IM 

2.0 

1.8 


11.25  11.4    11.6 


23  WEST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  N.Y.  14580 

(716)  872-4503 


CIHM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


CIHM/ICMH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historical  Microreproductions  /  Institut  canadien  de  microreproductions  historiquss 


^ 


^ 


:\ 


\ 


>^ 


<\ 


>!^ 


» 


%^ 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  Notes/Notes  techniques  et  bibliographiques 


The  Institute  has  attempted  to  obtain  the  best 
original  copy  available  for  filming.  Features  of  this 
copy  which  may  be  bibliographically  unique, 
which  may  alter  any  of  the  images  in  the 
reproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
the  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checked  below. 


L'Institut  a  microfilme  le  meilleur  exemplaire 
qui!  lui  a  ete  possible  de  se  procurer.  Les  details 
de  cet  exemplaire  qui  sont  peutetre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bibliographique,  qui  peuvent  modifier 
une  image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modification  dans  la  m6thode  normale  de  filmage 
sont  indiquds  ci-dessous. 


D 
D 
D 

n 
n 

D 
D 


D 


Coloured  covers/ 
Couverture  de  couleur 

Covers  damaged/ 
Couverture  endommagee 

Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Couverture  restaur6e  et/ou  pellicul6e 

Cover  title  missing/ 

La  titre  de  couverture  manque 

Coloured  maps/ 

Cartes  g6ographiques  en  couleur 

Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 
Encre  de  couleur  (i.e.  autre  que  bleue  ou  noire) 

Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 
Planches  et/ou  illustrations  en  couleur 

Bound  with  other  material/ 
Relid  avec  d'autres  documents 

Tight  binding  mey  cause  shadows  or  distortion 
along  interio.  margin/ 

Lareliure  serree  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  ae  la 
distorsion  le  long  de  la  marge  interleure 

Blank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
II  se  peut  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajout6es 
lors  d'une  restauration  apparaissent  dans  le  texte, 
mais,  lorsque  cela  6tait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  6x6  filmdes. 


□    Coloured  pages/ 
Pages  de  couleur 


-^ 


Pages  damaged/ 
Pages  endommagees 


□    Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Pages  restaur^es  et/ou  pelliculees 

□    Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 
Pages  decoior^es,  tachetees  ou  piquees 


n 


•  Pages  detached/ 
Pages  d^tachees 


Showthrough/ 
Transparence 


□    Quality  of  print  varies/ 
Quality  indgale  de  I'impression 

□    Includes  supplementary  material/ 
Comprend  du  materiel  supplementaire 


D 

n 


Only  edition  available/ 
Seule  Edition  disponible 

Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc.,  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  pages  totalement  ou  partiellement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'errata,  une  pelure, 
etc.,  ont  6t6  film6es  *  nouveau  de  facon  d 
obtenir  la  meilleure  image  possible 


n 


Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  suppl6mentaires; 


This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 
Ce  document  est  film*  au  taux  de  reduction  indiqu6  ci-dessous. 

18X  22X 


10X 


14X 


12X 


16X 


20X 


26X 


30X 


24X 


28X 


32X 


tails 
i  du 
odifier 
une 
mage 


The  copy  filmed  here  has  been  reproduced  thanks 
to  the  generosity  of: 

Library  of  Congress 
Photodupiication  Service 

The  images  appearing  here  are  the  best  quality 
possible  considering  the  condition  and  legibility 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  keeping  with  the 
filming  contract  specifications. 


Original  copies  in  printed  paper  covers  are  filmed 
beginning  with  the  front  cover  and  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, or  the  back  cover  when  appropriate.  All 
other  original  copies  are  filmed  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion,  and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impression. 


The  last  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche 
shall  contain  the  symbol  — ►  (meaning  "CON- 
TIIMUED"),  or  the  symbol  V  (meaning    END  ), 

whichever  applies. 

Maps,  plates,  charts,  etc.,  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  are  filmed 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diagrams  illustrate  the 
method: 


L'exemplaire  film6  fut  reproduit  grace  d  la 
g6n6rosit6  de: 

Library  of  Congress 
Photodupiication  Service 

Les  images  suivantes  ont  6t6  reproduites  avec  le 
plus  grand  soin,  compte  tenu  de  la  condition  et 
de  la  nettete  de  l'exemplaire  film6,  et  en 
conformit6  avec  les  conditions  du  contrat  de 
filmage. 

Les  exemplaires  originaux  dont  la  couverture  en 
papier  est  imprim6e  sont  film6s  en  commenpant 
par  le  premier  plat  et  en  terminant  soit  par  la 
derni6re  page  qui  comporte  une  emprsinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration,  soit  par  le  second 
plat,  selon  le  cas.  Tous  les  autres  exemplaires 
originaux  sont  film6s  en  commenpant  par  la 
premiere  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration  et  en  terminant  par 
la  derni6re  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
empreinte. 

Un  des  symboles  suivants  apparaitra  sur  la 
derni^re  image  de  cheque  microfiche,  selon  le 
cas:  le  symbole  — ^  signifie  "A  SUIVRE ',  le 
symbole  V  signifie  "FIN  ". 

Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc.,  peuvent  etre 
film6s  d  des  taux  de  reduction  diff6rents. 
Lorsque  le  document  est  trop  grand  pour  etre 
reproduit  en  un  seul  clich6,  il  est  film6  d  partir 
de  I'angle  sup6rieur  gauche,  de  gauche  d  droite, 
et  de  haut  en  bas,  en  prenant  le  nombre 
d'images  n6cessaire.  Les  diagrammes  suivants 
illustrent  la  m6thode. 


errata 

I  to 

t 

i  pelure, 

on  ci 


32X 


/ 


V 


■■'^/ 


THE    REOIFROOITY   TREi?LTY. 


d^ 


^A- 


V> 


SPEECH 


'y^ 


or 


y 


HON.  ALFRED  ELY, 


O  i     NEAV    YORK, 


DELIYBBED 


V 


IN  THE  HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES, 


<  / 


i 


'X, 


I 


V 


\ 


A 


JUNE   15,   1860 


..j-i-i^*'— 


-«■*■'» 


WASHlKatON '. 
1860» 


:^d:^fesji&J\': 


F 


MtfiiiiriliiiiliiMiMlnMi . 


.'<J,Vft^^'^  '■''  V;,/,," 


>..  \1 


-%■'' 


L 


m 


s^ 


I 


f\ 


THE   RECIFROOITY    TREA.TY. 


SPEECH 

or 

HON.  ALFRED  ELY,  OF  NEW  YORK, 

DELIVEUED, 

IN  THE  HOUSE  OF  REPUESENTATi'vES. 
JTTNE    15,    I860. 


The  llduw  being  in  Committee  of  the  Wliole  on  the  state  of  the  Union — Mr. 
ELY««id: 

Mr.  Chairman  :  On  the  2Gth  of  March  last  I  had  the  honor  to 
move  a  reeolutiou  which  was  adopted  by  this«Hou8e,  calling  upon 
the  President  of  the  United  States  for  information  relativ  3  to  the 
practical  working  of  the  treaty  concluded  with  Great  Britain  on 
the  5th  day  of  June,  1851,  commonly  called  the  "  Reciprocity 
Treaty."    I  will  thank  the  Clerk  to  read  the  resolution : 

'•Resolved,  That  the  Tresidentof  the  United  State8  be,  and  he  is  hereby  requested 
to  cotninuiiicate  to  this  House,  if  in  his  opinion  not  incompatible  with  the  public 
interest,  all  the  information  in  his  possession  relative  to  the  practical  working 
of  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  concluded  with  Great  Britain  on  the  ftth  day  of  June, 
1854;  whether  the  Provincial  Government  of  Canada  has  not  through  its  Legisla- 
ture, violated  the  spirit  of  the  said  treaty — what  has  been  the  practical  effects  of 
the  3d  clause  of  the  said  treaty  npon  the  interests  of  the  respective  countries. 
What  measures,  if  an)',  have"  been  taken  to  procure  correct  information  touching 
the  practical  operations  and  effect  of  the  3d  clause  of  the  said  treaty  Upon  the  in- 
terests of  American  citizens,  and  whether  in  his  opinion  the  said  3d  article  of  the 
said  treaty  could  not  with  advantage  to  American  intei'csts,  be  either  amended  or 
rescinded." 

. .  To  this  resolution  no  response  has  yet  been  received.  I  should 
liave  been  much  gratified  to  have  obtained  the  information  called 
for  l>y  the  resolution,  befoi-e  entering  upon  any  discussion  of  this 
subject.  But,  sir,  as  the  sesjBipn  is  drawing  to  a  close,  I  am  un- 
willing to  await  longer  the  dilltory  movements  of  the  Executive, 
before  calling  the  attention  of  this  llonse,  and  of  tlie  whole 
country,  so  far  as  I  am  able,  to  a  question  of  vital  importance, 
not  only  to  my  constituents,  but  to  the  people  of  our  common 
'country. 

Sir,  at  this  time,  when  the  subject  of  a  modification  of  our 
tariff  laws  is  challenging  so  much  attention  in  Congress  and 
throughout  the  country,  the  practical  operation  of  this  Reciprocity 
Treaty  becomes  a  subject  of  peculiar  interest  to  the  American 
statesmati.    To  what  extent  it  ties  our  hands  against  legislation 


liiiiiirii 


ar"  BOiue  industrial  interests  of  our  c.uzens  to  ,vluch  mo  con 
attVud  no  protection  as  against  lore.gu  competition 

S/^Iv'e' nolS'S^  aSr^'to'T^ninrt  S^^'^}^  ^ 

<\v  tliip  treaty  was  commenueu  to  us  uuaer  lue  '"'"""Ko  p„ 
feir,  nut  ueai^  wao  c  rhristened  by  the  name  of  ''Ue- 

iif  a  frpG  trade  measure.     It  was  ciiribitsnt/u  uj  i- 

have  been  reluS  by  the  people  of  this  country,  wo  shall  be  en- 
abled to  indge,  when  we  com«  to  examine  the  operations  of  th« 

SlSa^iSc^rFl^n 


Si„  yon  have  hut  to  ^ance  your  eye  over  this  scheduM^ 
S  ^1    rfreTintchan'gTfetUn  the  two  countries  of 
Jhp  articles  embraced  in  it,  and  of  those  articles  only.    It  appeam 
Shuyeteen  prepared  with  special  reference  to  mcluding  eyery 


,_,.,1!t^- 


„.L 


^Mffi!^'^ 


•article  of  Canadian  prodm-tion  which  can  ever  fij\!;  "^^j;!;;,;^;" 
this  country,  and  exc  I'dini;  every  pro(hiction  ot  tins  conmiy 
wWch  conS'-find  a  market  in  the  British  North  A"-v)can  M^^ 
nies  Tlio  surrdns  productions  of  these  colonies  consist,  ahnost 
eSu.ivel V  of  the  very  classes  of  articles  embraced  in  this  sched- 
X  So  comuioditL  constitute  the  entire  ^us>s  of  the.r  e^- 
iM^rt  trade ;  and  wo  are  their  nearest  and  best  customers,  ad  their 
argestt^i'smners.  We  purchase  from  Canada  -;";«  «^J  ;.^  »  ^  ] 
cles  embraced  in  the  schedule  than  she  sells  to  all  the  woild  be- 

^"weare  also  larse  producers  of  the  same  classes  of  articles. 
Of  nXf  hem!we,\n  common  with  Canada  produce  a  large 
surplus  which  must  seek  H  market  in  some  joreign  conn  ry. 
ffwe'nrier  have  found,  and  never  shall  J"^' ff^ '"^^^^i", 
Canada,  or  in  any  of  the  provinces  <^™^'-««;,^  .;";^'^,^\'ff:.,,  ,^ 
Canada  the  privilege  of  exporting  to  the  United  S  ates  ticc  ot 
duty  the  ardc\es  emLaced  iJi  the  schedule,  is  one  oi  nj^^al-^^^^^^^^^^ 
valie.  It  is  all  that  she  could  ask  or  desire— for  the  sc  leclu  e 
In  mces  everything  she  has  to  export.  To  us,  the  privilege  ot 
expoS  the  slme  articles  duty  free  to  Canada,  is  but  the  barren 
tunvileee  of  "  carrying  coals  to  Newcastle. 

^  it  isfnie  that  Cana§a,  and  the  other  British  provinces  embraced 
in  the  treaty,  would  open  to  us  a  most  desirable  market  lor  a 
gVat  variety' of  the  pJoductions  of  our  manufactories  and  our 
Sshops  ff  they  could  ^o  there  duty  free,  or  at  reasonab  e 
rates  of  duty.    T  ey  would  furnish  a  valuable  market  foi  our 
leather  boots  and  shoes,  and  other  manufactures  of  leather;  for 
oui  reaping,  mowing,  and  threshing  machines,  and  other  agricul- 
?^  aUmplements;  for  our  multifarious  ^^-^^^-'''''\,fj;'\^^ 
steel  of  brass,  and  other  metals;  for  our  carriages,  saddlery  and 
harnesB ;  for  our  machinery,  our  fire-arms,  an!  our  edge-^ools 
for  our  cotton,  woolen,  and  india-rubber  goods,  and  for  an  almost 
endless  variety  of  the  products  of  Yankee  ingenuity,  industry 
and  enterprise,  which  I  shall  not  attempt  to  enumerate.     But  all 
these  proEi^ns  are  excluded  from  the  schedule  with  as  scrupu- 
ous  aCe  L  every  conceivable  article  of  .Canadian  producUon 
which  can  find  a  market  in  this  country  is  inc  uded  in  it      And 
not  only  are  they  excluded  from  the  list  of  articles  made  tree  by 
?he  treaty,  but  the  colonial  authorities  are  left  a    liberty  to  in- 
crease thiir  imposts  upon  ihem  at  pleasure;  a  privilege  thj  W 
exercised  to  tlii  point  of  prohibition  in  respect  to  ™any  ot  them. 
Mr.  Chairman  when  the  President  shall,  in  his  own  g?od  tmie 
•  respond  to  the  resolution  which  has  just  been  read  he  will  doubt- 
less send  us  a  copy  of  the  report  recently  made  hy  the  Hon.  Israel 
T  Hatch,  of  the  State  whicli  I  have  the  honor  in  part  to  repre- 
sent, whJ  was  appointed  a  special  agent  to  examine  into  the  ope- 
rations of  this  treaty,  and  report  thereon.     I  desired  much  that 
that  document  should  be  communicated  to  this  Houee  before  1 
should  proceed  to  the  discussion  of  this  subject ;  biit  I  am  not, 
wholly  i^orant  of  the  character  of  its  conten  s.    When  it  shall 
be  madeVbUc,  if  I  am  not  greatly  mistaken,  it  will  be  found  to 


milSi 


,^..     ^,.«.-i..a..^- A*^"- 


justify,  and  more  tlmn  jnatify,  all  that  I  have  said,  or  shall  say, 
I  in  deiuiuciatioii  of  this  treaty  as  an  nmnitigated  chgat  and  swindle. 
I  propose  to  examine,  first,  the  effects  of  this  treaty  upon  our 
federal  revenues.  During  the  year  1854:,  which  was  the  last 
year  previous  to  the  taking  effect  of  the  treaty,  we  derived  a 
•  revenue  from  ax'ticles  imported  from  Canada  alone,  which  are 
now  made  free  hy  the  treaty,  of  ahout  $1,250,000,  and  including 
all  the  provinces  embraced  in  the  treaty,  amounting  to  more  than 
!j<l,500,000.  Assuming  that  the  reveuues  from  these  sources 
would  have  continued  to  increase  since  that  year  in  the  same 
ratio  that  it  had  increased  for  five  years  previously,  it  would  have 
now  reached  nearly  two  millions  per  aimum,  if  the  treaty  had 
never  been  nnule,  and  would  have  amounted  in  the  aggregate, 
since  the  time  that  the  treaty  took  effect,  to  more  than  eleven 
vi'dlionis  of  ddMan.  But  this  branch  of  our  foreign  commerce, 
instead  of  yielding  us  an  annual  revenue  of  some  $2,000,000, 
is  now,  undm*  the  operation  of  the  treaty,  an  actual  drain  upon 
the  treasury  to  the  extent  of  isSiowX.  fifty  thousand  dollars  per  an- 
num. For  since-  the  treaty  went  into  operation,  the  reveuMe  re- 
ceived at  the  vario^.s  ports  of  entry  on  our  northern  frontier,  has 
80  fallen  off,  that  the  expenses  of  collecting  it  during  the  last 
four  years  exceed  the  gross  receipts  by  tiie  sum  of  $189,780.  And 
3'et,  to  guard  against  the  surreptitious  introduction  of  foreign  mer- 
chandise through  these  northern  ports,  it  is  absolutely  necessary  to 
nuiintain  the  same  custom-house  organization  on  our  northern 
frontier,  and  at  the  same  expense,  as  when  duties  were  collected 
on  the  articles  which  now  come  in  duty  free. 

Mr.  Chairman,  the  fact  that  this  treaty  has  operated  to  dimiii- 
ish  our  revenue,  does  not  necessarily  condemn  it.  If  the  people 
have  received  equivalents  in  some  other  form — if  it  has  opened 
new  markets  for  the  products  of  their  labor ;  if  it  has  liglitened 
the  burdens  imposed  upon  their  export  trade,  or  stimulated  in- 
dustry and  enterprise  at  home,  these  benefits  should  be  placed  to 
its  credit,  and  set  off  against  any  loss  to  the  Federal  revenues 
which  may  have  resulted  from  it.  But,  sir,  an  examination  of  its 
practical  operations  and  effects  will  reveal  no  such  redeeming 
traits  in  its  character.  It  has  tended  rather  to  restrict  than  to  en- 
large the  foreign  markets  for  our  exportable  productions.  It  has 
imposed  new  burdens  upon  our  export  trade,  instead  of  lighten- 
ing those  which  before  oppressed  it.  And  instead  of  stimmating 
domestic  industry  and  enterprise,  it  has  invitdd  the  productions 
of  foreign  labor  and  foreign  soils  to  compete  with  the  productions 
of  our  own  citizens,  in  our  own  markets. 

The  effect  of  the  treaty  in  throwing  upon  our  markets,  duty 
free,  a  large  increase  of  Canadian  productions,  to  compete  with 
similar  productions  of  our  own  soil,  is  strikingly  exhibited  by  a 
little  table  which  I  w^U  now  present.  This  table  shows  the 
amounts  of  goods  imported  from  Canada,  chargeable  with  duty, 
and  free  of  duty,  for  four  year^  next  preceding  the  treaty,  in  con- 
trast with  the  amounts  of  both  classes  imported  during  four  years 
Bubseqpent  to  the  treaty.  » 


^  ^-^^..^t.satum'.' 


I 


7  ■ 

Importations  from  Canada  to  the  United  States. 

PRIOR  TO  TUB  TREATT. 

ITBKK  or  nUTV.      BUBiKirt  TO  DtJTT. 

«1,62».086  IM'ift.'JSfl 

18B1 701671  3,828,;ilt8 

"»2 ••     inft'.ftS'i  4,008,4^4 

»«58 380.040  M^MOS 

18S4 _! _ 

13,860,979  *n,(l»6,nti 

BUDSEQUKNT  TO  TUB  THKATY. 

ITBKK  OK  DUTY.        SUBJECT  TO  1>IITT. 

,„,^,                                                       tll6,847,82a  If.  10.375 

185«* 17,600,737  091,007 

W6'' 11,1107,018  818,953 

1868 18,703,748  604,909 

186» '       ' 

J59,419,925  *2,16(),394 

From  this  table  it  will  be  seen  that  during  tlfc  four  years  next 
succoodinj.  tlie  treaty,  our  imports  from  Canada  amoun  ed  to 
Xlv  three  times  as  much  as  (luring  the  four  years  nnmed.ately 
p'ieiediag  i  s  ratification.    It  will  also  be  seen  that  while  lor  tour 
voars  next  ureceding  the  treaty,  more  than  tour-hfths  ot  all  our 
Soratfons^from  Canada  wore  subject  to  duty,  for  the  our  yeai^ 
subsequent  to  it  less  than  one  twenty-ninth  paii  ot    hem  ha  e 
contributed  anything  whatever  to  our  revenue.     And  even  ot  tlic 
Sng  mnount^s  of  importations  from  tl^'*\«?""^'T  w  "ch  have 
paid  luties  since  the  treaty,  less  than  onethird  are  the  pro.luc- 
Eons  of  Canada.     Of  the  $2,150,394  paying  dxity  during  tliefo 
-years  subsequent  to  the  treaty  as  shown  by  the  f*;^^  "S  ^^^^^^ 
Iron  hardware,  and  salt,  articles  not  produced  in  Canada  foi  ox- 
port'atlon,  make  un  the  sum  of  $1,548,156  being  --e  than  two- 
thirds  of  the  whole  amount.    So  that  m  tact,  ot  all  the  pioduc- 
tons  of  Canada  which  seek  our  markets,  the  proportion  paying 
Zy  is  so  utterly  insignificant  as  to  be  wholly  unworthy  of  con- 
Sation;  ranging,  one  year  with  another,  somewhere  between 

"^^^ZMXAn^r^  to  .ay  heavy,  and  increas- 
ing duties  upon  much  more  than  one-haff  ot  all  our  exports  to 
Canada,  as  will  appear  by  another  table  which  I  now  present 
showinc^  t^e  value  of  our  exports  to  that  country,  -paying  duty  and 
free  of  duty,  for  the  four  years  next  succeedmg  tlie  year  that  the 
treaty  took  effect. 
i ,  Value  of  ooods  exported  from  the  United  States  to  Canada. 

,,  rutwo    y    y  X-  .,  .  PATINO  DUTY.  FREE  OF  DUTY. 

,.'•                                .                       111,446,472  19,379,204 

'   }f"- ;■ 12,770,923  9,933,580 

,  J°tS ....   9,906,430  10,258,220 

1868;!:!!!!i'.'.".."..'.".".-'""-"'-"""--'--        8,4'73,607  7.161.958 

$42,660,432  $30,732,908 

'  '^{Jf  the  articles  which  go  to  make  up  this  item  of  $36,732,968, 
exported  to  Canada  free  of  duty,  onfy  a  small  proportion  have 

■T^,;7~;;:;;;~rm7i^mitted  because  they  were  in  part  made  before 
Au-  fr"- *"  ♦""'»•  ^ff«rt*--  ftn'^  in  nart  afterwards. 


i^mHmmIMkmMI 


mmitJikitr. 


■  ■■-■■liiSfeMiiWfa 


8 

cone  in  free  hecauae  of  the  treaty,  tho  loadinc;  vnriotioH  having 
boon  adniittod  free  botbio  tho  treaty  oxistod.    Wheat,  tor  in- 
Btanco,  ono  of  the  larRO  itetnB  in  tho  HhI  ot  our  troo  oxpoiaB  to 
Canada,  was  admitted  free  before  .tho  treaty,  and  would  have 
continued  bo  if  tho  treaty  had  never  boon  nuide,  because  it  m 
tho  interest  of  Canadian  millers  and  Bhip-owners  to  have  it  bo 
admitted.    It  does  not  go  to  Canada  for  consumption  tlioro— l^an- 
ada  herself  producing  much  more  wheat  than  sho  consumes,    it 
is  either  returned  to  us  in  Uie  form  of  Hour,  duty  tree,  or  shipped 
abroad.    In  either  case  tho  eflfect  is  rather  preiudicial  than  bene- 
ficial to  American  industry  and  entorpriso.    If  it  gooB  to  l.anada 
merely  to  be  converted  into  flour  anti  returned  to  us,  our  millers 
lose  the  profit  of  manufacturing  it.     If  it  goes  there  to  bo  shipi>cd 
to  Europe,  in  foreign  bottoms,  our  ship-owners  lose  the  pronta 
of  carrying  it.    So,  although  our  wheat  does  not  go  into  Canada 
free  of  duty,  because  of  the  treaty,  it  would  bo  no  argument  in 
favor  of  tho  treaty  even  if  it  did.     Indian  corn,  another  promi- 
nent item  in  tho  free  list,  was  also  free  belore  tho  treaty,  and 
would  have  remained  free  independent  of  the  treaty,  becanso 
Canada  is  not  herself  a  corn-producing  country,  and  tinds  it  to 
her  advantage  to  pnrchaso  com  from  us.  ,    *    „„j 

In  the  tables  I  have  presented,  of  exports  and  imports  to  and 
from  tho  United  States  and  Canada,  foreign  merchandise  merely 
carried  through  the  respective  countries,  is  included,  lo  sliow 
the  effects  of  the  treaty  upon  the  industrial  interests  of  the  tAvo 
countries,  however,  foreign  merchandise  should  be  excluded,  and 
the  domestic  products  of  the  resnective  countries  only  embraco<L 
I  now  present,  therefore,  a  tab'le  of  the  products  ot  the  United 
States,  exported  to  Canada,  and  paying  duties  there,  and  ot  pro- 
ducts of  Canada  imported  to  this  country,  and  paying  duties  here, 
for  the  three  years  next  after  the  treaty  went  fully  into  effect . 
Products  of  the  Untied  States  iviyiwj  duty  in  Canada. 

,„.,  17,981.284 

\l°^ 6,-.J03,320 

il°l 4,624,603 

1888 $18,709,107 

Products  of  Canada  paying  duty  in  the  United  States. 

$186,870 

1866 ..' 160,08« 

1867 i ■■   119,368 

1888 .     416,814 

„,„  $18,293,293 

Difference..! 

Tlius  it  appears,  that  while  our  people  have  paid  duties  to  Can- 
ada on  proSucts  of  the  United  States  exported  to  that  country, 
amonntiLto$18,709,107i  the  people  of  Canada  have  paid  duties 
on  products  of  their  'country  exported  to  thie,  durmgthe  same 
veaVs,  amounting  only  to  the  pitiful  sum  of  $415,814-the  pro- 
portion being  fo?ty-8ii  to  one."^  The  Lord  deliver  us  from  such 
"  recit)rocitv     as  tliis !  ,     ..      ,         j 

Thise,  m.  Chairman,  are  some  of  tho  legitimate  and  necessary 
effects  of  the  treaty.  But  the  Canadian  authorities,  not  content 
to  rest  upon  the  immense  advantages.legitimately  flowing  from  it, 


9 

have  availed  tlicmsolvos  of  a..  direct  and  incidcntnl  power 
whicli  it  L'ivcH  thoin,  to  impoRO  .poii  oair  export  trade  t(j  t lint 
country,  now  und  intolerable  l)\irdcnH.  Every  year  since  the  rati- 
fication of  the  treaty,  they  have  boon  regularly  and  HVHleniati- 
cally  increasing  their  duties  ujioii  the  leadinf;  articles  ot  American 
production  soeking  their  tnarkots,  till  the»e  duties  on  nuiny  ot 
thoia,  amount  to  a  i)ractical  prohibition.  Kvery  year  tlio  C  ana- 
dian  Parliament  has  passed  a  new  taritl"  act,  imposiing  additu.nal 
burdens  upon  importations  from  this  country.  The  following 
table  exhibits  the  ad  valorem  duties  that  liave  been  levied,  by 
bor  succossivo  tariff  acts,  since  the  ratilication  of  the  treaty,  upon 
certain  articles  which  wo  largely  produce,  and  which  in  times 
past  wo  largely  exported  to  that  country : 

18BB.    1850.   1867.   1888.    18.10. 

!tr^-----::;:::;::::  1^1     |^     »     ?|     i 

Cottonfl«o,U 124  Vol  W  fl  ^0 

\r.PnOood. i  f, 

£ir':::::::::::::::::::::::::::l«*     n     n     i8     50 

KefineaauK«P «2,  28  2r  264  40 

OtherSugar 2^  20  17*  21  80 

•    Mr.  Chairman,  you  may  tell  mo  that  these  increased  and  in- 
creasing impositions  upon  our  export  trade  to  Canada  are  not  the 
effects  of  the  treaty.     I  admit,  sir,  that  they  are  not  legitimaie 
and  necessary  effects  of  it;  but  they  are,  novertlieiess,  justly 
chargeable  to  it.    If  the  treaty  were  not  in  existence,  tliePO  bur- 
dens would  not  bo  imposed— we  conld  prevent  them  trom  being 
imposed,  or,  at  least,  counteract  their  effects.    If  our  hands  were 
not  tied  by  the  treaty,  wo  could  retaliate  by  imposing  similar  Un- 
ties upon  the  productions  of  Canada  seeking  our  markets,  and 
thus  render  it  unprofitable  for  the  Canadian  Parliament  to  indulge 
in  such  legislation  toward  ub.    But  having  bound  us  by  the  treaty 
to  admit  all  her  productions  free  of  duty,  without  assuming  any 
corresponding  obligation  in  respect  to  the  productions  ot  this 
country  which  seek  her  markets,  and  without  even  binding  her- 
self to  abstain  from  imposing  additional  burdens  upon  them  at 
pleasure,  we  are  left  wholly  at  her  mercy.    Sir,  it  is  altogether 
incomprehensible  to  me,  bow  our  Government  ever  came  to  be  so 
overreached  at  every  point— bow  it  ever  came  to  yield  its  assent 
to  a  treaty,  the  legitimate  workings  of  which  are  so  much  to  our 
prejudice,  without  at  least  requiring  some  guarant:y  that  it  should 
not  be  made  still  more  intolerable  by  such  legislation  as  this. 
You  may  denounce  this  legislation  as  being  a  breach  ot  good 
faith,  and  in  violation  of  the  spirit  of  the  treaty—and  it  deserves 
to  be  so  denounced— but  that  will  not  excuse  the  blind  fatuity 
which  led  us  into  the  snare.  , 

Sir,  view  this  treaty  from  whatever  stand-point  you  may,  it 
presents  the  same  forbidding  aspect.  Its  effects  upon  our  public 
revenues,  and  the  private  interests  of  our  citizens,  are  alike  per- 
nicious. It  is  prej udicial  alike  to  the  interests  of  our  farmers  and 
our  mechanics,  our  manufacturers  and  our  merchants,  our  lum- 


_.^»  -.-k  *—#■-...  A,-*- ^f»i- 


'     '^  •■'-' 


J 


10 

berrneu  and  our  fishermen.    Its  operations  are  wholly  an^l  thor- 
oughly mischievous,  presenting  scarcely  one  redeeming  trait 

What  are  its  effects  upon  the  interests  ot  our  farmei^?  It 
throws  wide  open  the  gates  of  our  markets,  ah^^ys  ovei-stocked 
with  thn  productions  of  our  own  soil,  to  a  prolihc  agncuW 
region  lying  at  their  very  thresholds.  It  invites  tree  compet  tion 
S  an  agdcultural  people,  the  fertility  and  eheai>ness  ot  whose 
vh-gin  lani,  and  the  comparative  lightness  ot  whose  taxes  ena- 
bles them  to'  undersell  us  in  our  own  markets,  j^"'  ^^«^^^^J 
suppose  that  the  agricultural  products  ot  Canada,  thus  thrown 
uprmir  markets,  l?P.ve  no  series  influence  in  depressu^  price  , 
have  taken  but  a  vpry  supeifieial  view  ot_  the  fY'Lri^Tlul'- 
sons  I  apprehend,  would  regard  the  closing  ot  the  ports  ot  i.ng- 

and  against  our  vkieat  and  lour  as  a  K-^^  calamity  to  the  wheat 
growofs  of  this  country.     And  yet  it  would  be  less  ^^^^J  *<> 
their  inierests  than  this  throwing  open  ot  our  markets  to Jl  «  whea 
and  flour  of  Canada.     Daring  the  hscal  year  ending  on  te  30tl 
of  June,  1859,  the  value  of  wheat  and  flour  imported  by  us  tiom 
CamX  was  more  than  double  that  of  all  we  exported  to  England 

*^The  frefadmission  of  the  agricultural  productions  of  Canaaa 
to  our  markets,  tends  to  equalize  the  value  of  lands  on  both  sideb 
of  tl  e  line,  to  the  great  disadvantage  of  our  own  landed  propne- 
ti.     Sir,  it  is  a  self-evident  proposition  that  lands  on  the  Canada 
side  of  the  line,  equally  productive  with  lands  on  our  own  side, 
are  intrinsically  worth  L'much,  if  the  same  ^«P^«ts  a.^  ccuuinon 
to  both,  and  equally  accessible  to  both-especia Uy  it  the  Canada 
ands  are  subject  to  less  taxation  than  ours.    .K  it  could  be  known 
that  the  provisions  of  the  treaty  would  be  indefinitely  perpetu- 
ated, laVd  in  my  own  District,  the  richest  portion  of  the  Genesee 
Valley!  which  before  the  treaty  would  haye  commanded  sra^ty 
dMaJsmr  acre,  would  be  intrinsically  worth  little,  it  any  more, 
Slaifdson^he  other  side  of  the  lini  that  could  nave  been  pur- 
chased at  the  same  time  for  less  than  ^^'^^V /^^^'^'''^fJZ 
equalization  is  effected,  as  much  by  depreciating  the  value  of  the 
higher-priced,  as  by  increasing  the  value  of  the  lower-priced  lands 
\e  injurious  eft^ects  of  this  treaty  upon  our  mechanical  and 
luanufacturing  interests,  spring  ma,inly  from  the  '' J^^^^f ^^ JPf" 
islation"  which  the  treaty  has  put  it  in  the  power  of  the  Canadian 
PaXment  to  practice  towards  them.   The  increasing  duties  which 
have  been  levfed  trom  year  to  year  upon  the  productions  o    our 
^vorkshops  and  manufactories,  since  the  ratification  ot  .tl»e  tieaty, 
have  been  driving  them  out  of  the  Canadian  markets.    Many  ot 
these  productions  which  still  sought  those  "^^^kets  in  spite  ot  the 
increasing  impositions  upon  them,  prior  to  1859,  are  by  the  tanff 
act  oTthlt  vSar  whou/  excluded.    That  act  has  not  been  long 
enlugh  in  fm-ce  to  furii  any  statistics  showing  to  what  ex  ent 
imStions  of  manufactured  articles  from  this  country  will  be 
diiShed  by  it;   It  api>ear*,  howfeier,  froin  a  table  which  I  have 
„iTJ^Tri.u{ft.HdmttkDrodueteofthis'country,  paying  d^^^^ 

Fn  Clnkdalconsisting,  almosUxcluslvely,  of  manutact^^^^^^^ 
decUned  from  $7,981,284  in  1856,  to  $4,524,503,  m  1858.    Under 


ifci  '      ''■\  -"--■ 


>-— "^^W-^,  s^.lo'-JI '"' 


11 

« 

tho  operation  of  tlio  Canadian  tariff  act  of  1830,  tlio  fulling  off 
must  be  in  a  still  greater  ratio.  In  fact  these  onerous  dntics  are 
not  only  driving  our  manufactures  out  of  the  Canadian  niarkets, 
but  they  are  tending  to  the  transfer  of  capital  and  enterprise  from 
this  country  to  that.  Many  of  our  most  enterprising  manufac- 
turers have'  already  transplanted  their  establishments  to  Canadian 
soil,  to  secure  the  benefit  of  her  markets  without  being  subjected 
to  these  duties ;  and  many  more  will  follow  their  example.  Thus, 
under  the  operation  of  a  policy  which  owes  its  existence  to  this 
treaty,  we  are  not  only  losing  a  valuable  trade,  but  actually  losing 
a  most  valuable  class  of  citizens,  and  no  inconsiderable  amount 
of  solid  capital. 

This  treaty  operates  to  the  prejudice  of  our  merchants  and 
traders' also,  not  only  by  diminishing  their  sales  to  Canada,  of  the 
products'  of  our  manufactories — excluded  from  her  markets  as  I 
have  just  shown— but  they  also  suffer  from  "  unfriendly  legisla- 
tion" on  the  part  of  the  Canadian  rarliameut.  Formerly,  the 
peo])le  of  Canada  AYest  purchased  numy  of  the  productions  of 
foreign  countries  in  our  markets,  paying  no  higher  duties  upon 
them  than  if  purchased  in  the  country  of  their  production,  and 
introduced  by  the  river  St.  Lawrence.  The  duties  then  beitig 
specific,  they  amounted  to  no  more  on  goods  introduced  by  the 
way  of  our  Atlantic  cities,  than  when  introduced  through  the  St. 
Lawrence.  But  the  law  has  been  changed,  and  ad  valorem  du-^ 
ties  are  now  charged,  upon  the  value  of  the  goods  at  ilu  lylace  of 
purclum.  The  Canadian  purchaser,  therefore,  if  he  now  buys 
his  goQds  in  Boston  or  New  York,  must  not  only  pay  duty  upon 
the  original  cost  in  tho  foreign  country,  but  upon  that  cost  with 
interest,  freight,  insurance,  and  profito  of  the  American  merchant 
added,  Tliis  policy  now  drives  the  merchant  of  western  Canada 
to  Montreal,  to  purchase  the  goods  which  he  formerly  bought  in 
our  own  markets.  And  this  operates  not  only  to  the  prejudice  of 
our  raercliaiits,  but  of  our  carriers  as  well.  The  legislation  which 
has  produced  this  result,  is  one  of  the  indirect  and  incidental 
effects  of  the  treaty ;  at  least,  it  is  legislation  which  we  might 
counteract,  if  our  hands  were  not  tied  by  the  treaty. 

No  class  of  our  pitizens  have  felt  more  keenly  the  pernicious 
effects  of  this  abominable  treaty,  than  our  enterprising  lumber- 
men. We  have  no  resources  for  the  production  of  lumber  at  all 
comparable  to  the  vast  primeval  forests  of  Canada,  New  Bruns- 
wick, and  Nova  Scotia.  The  timber  lands  in  these  provinces  are 
mostly  owned  by  the  Government,  which  grants  the  privilege  of 
cutting  timber,  at  prices  little  more  than  nominal.  The  himb6r- 
men  of  this  conntry,  who  have  to  pay  high  prices  for  inferior 
timber  lands,  cannot  successfully  compete  with  the  products  of 
these  forests.  The  throwing  open  of  our  markets  to  them,  has 
rendered  inany  large  iavestments  in  the  timber  lauds  of  this  coun- 
try ruinous  to  their  proprietors,  and  stricken  down  numerous  large 
enierprices  undertaken  by  our.  citizens,  with  the  brightest  pros; 
pecta  of  success.  Much  American  capital  and  enterprise  has  thus 
been  driven  out  of  our  own  country  to  seek  investment  and  em- 
ploy luciit  iu  tuc  iOfcsta  Oi  tusse  provinces. 


12 

Even  onv  fishermen,  for  whose  fecial  benefit  the  large  conces- 
eions  of  this  treaty  were  supposed  to  be  made,  hnd  that  the  privi- 
lege accorded  to"  them  of  taking  fish  in  the  bays,  harbors,  and 
creeks  of  the  British  provinces,  is  more  than  counterbalanced  by 
the  like  privilege  extended  to  British  siibiects,  of  taking  hsh  upon 
onr  shores  and  coasts,  coupled,  as  it  is,  with  the  still  more  nnport- 
ant  privilege  of  introducing  the  products  of  their  hshenes  into 
our  markets,  duty  free.  .  , 

Pennsylvania  will  in  vain  demand  protection  to  her  great  coal 
interest,  while  this  treaty  remains  in  force.  So  long  as  ^ova 
Scotia,  by  means  of  cheap  and  easy  water-carriage,  can  tiirow 
the  products  of  her  extensive  coal  mines  into  all  our  seaboard 
markets,  duty  free,  protection  to  the  coal  interests  ot  1  ennsylva- 
nia  and  Maryland  will  be  wholly  out  of  the  question,  in  vain 
will  they  appeal  to  Congress  for  relief,  while  our  power  to  grant 
it  is  paralyzed  by  this  treaty.  .,      '     1 1     ■„4.^ 

Mr.  Chairman,  without  pretending  to  go  very  thoroughly  into 
this  subject,  or  to  notice  any  but  the  most  prominent  features  in 
the  opektions  of  this  treaty,  I  trust  I  have  succeeded  in  showing 
that  there  is  no  "  reciprocity  "  in  the  article  which  provides  lor  a 
free  interchange  of  the  commodities  enumerated  in  the  schedule. 
I  trust  I  have  succeeded  in  showing,  that  as  affecting  every  pub- 
lic or  private  interest,  the  advantages  of  this  arrangement  are  all 
on  one  side,  and  all  against  us.  Where,  then,  are  the  reciprocal 
benefits  conferred  upon  our  citizens?  Outside  of  this  airange- 
ment,  for  the  free  interchange  of  the  productions  specified  in  the 
schedule,  there  are  but  two  provisions  of  the  treaty  which  pre-- 
tend  to  confer  any  privileges  or  benefits  upon  the  people  ot  this 
country. 
These  provisions  are — 

1st  The  grant  of  a  privilege  to  the  inhabitanta  of  the  United  St«tf«  »«  t»J« 
fish  of  every  kind,  except  shell  fish,  on  the  sea  coast  and  shores,  and  in  the  bavs 
JaZrs  and^creeks'of  CaLda,  New  Brunswick.  Nova  Scot  a  and  P"""*  Ef-«-  » 
Island  and  of  thrf  several  islands  adjacent  thereto,  without  being  restricted  to  any 
distance  from  the  shore ;  and  of  drying  their  nets  and  curing  their  fish  on  the  shores 

"^jrrgtniri'^cSns  of  the  United  States,  of  the  right  to  navigate  th 
river  St  Lawrence  and  the  canals  in  Canada,  used  as  the  means  of  communicating 
betwS  «ie  great  lakes  and  the  Atlantic  Ocean,  with  their  vessels,  boat,  and  craf  s 
subject  only  to  tlie  same  tolls  and  assessments  as  are  or  may  be  exacted  of  BritiBh 
subjecte. 

Sir  if  we  have  received  any  benefits  from  the  treaty  to  com- 
pensate us,  in  the  slightest  degree,  for  the  ruinous  concessions 
made  by  the  third  article,  it  must  be  by  virtue  of  one  or  the 
other,  or  both  of  these  provisions.  ^       ,  ,     ,i_  «,!, 

I  have  already  stated  that  the  privileges  conferred  by  the  hsU- 
inff  grant,  are  more  than  compensated  by  a  similar  privilege  ex- 
tended to  British  subjects  on  our  part,  and  by  the  privilege  of  in- 
troducin<r  the  products  of  their  fisheries  to  our  markets,  duty  tree. 
I  do  not  pretend  to  understand  this  branch  of  the  subjept  very 
well  myself,  but  I  am  informed  by  those  who  represent  large 
fishing  interests  on  this  floor,  that  the  treaty  is  regarded  as  pre- 
:„  j:„:„i  ♦«  fi,r^a«  Sntorpata     This  being  the  case,  we  get  no    reci- 


indicial  to  those  interests. 

prOCIlj'       uiiucr  Hits  liciiiito 


B 


i 


i*' 


] 


13 

We  have  only  the  nrivilego  of  navigating  the  river  St.  Law- 
reiice  ami  the  canak  of  Canali,  to  fall  back  upon  ;  and  it  ^ve  do 
fo   find  "reciprocity"  here,  we' may  as  well  abandon  the  search. 
The  ant  ci^>ited  advantages  to  be  derived  from  the  ^00  naviga- 
tion of  the  St.  Lawrence,  have  proved  utterly  delusive.    That 
■  ver  is  ce-bo  nd  nearly  half  the  year,  and  when  it  is  open,  oiir 
avieators  do  not  see  fit  to  avail  themselves  of  the  privilege  of 
Sfi       b-.nce  the  ratification  of  the  treaty,  up  to  the  closing  of 
avfea  on  in  1859,  it  appears  by  official  statements  that  onlv /o.^| 
Skean  vessels,  'with  only  12,550  tons  burden,  IukI  P^^f  ^^f" 
ward  through  that  river,  and  only  mneteen  vesses,  with  on  y 
5  446  tons  burden,  had  returned  from  sea  through  the  same  clian- 
uel      And  this  is  the  sum  total  of  all  the  much-vaunt.Kl  benefits 
W  were  to  derive  trom  the  free  navigation  of  the  St.  LaAvi-ence  I 
Wa   it  for  this  that  we  sacrificed  an  annual  revenue  0    two  mil- 
lions of  dollars  ?     Was  it  for  this  that  we  threw  open  our  ports  to 
aU  the  agricultural  products  of  the  British  provinces,  to  surfeit  our 
markets°already  made  plethoric  by  the  productions  ol  our  own 
BoU  ?    Wa  S  this  that  we  put  it'in  the  power  of  the  Canadian 
Parliament  to  drive  the  products  of  our  workshops  and  manutac- 
WsLmher  marts,  by  ihe  imposition  of  onerous  taxes  upon 
S   Was  it  for  this  that  we  struck  down  the  value  ot  our  timber 
ands,  and  visited  disaster  and  ruin  ui)on  many  enteiTnsmg  ci  - 
zens  who  were  engaged  in  the  lumbering  business^    Is  it  toi  this, 
?ha?  capital  and  enterprise  are  being  driven  outot  our  own  coun- 
try, and  transplanted  to  a  foreign  soil  J  •     ,•  „  ,1,^  Of 

^But,8ir,  even  this  miserable  privilege  of  "^vigating  the  St.  . 
Lawrence  was  only  granted  to  us  upon  the  conditaon  that  British 
BiSs  should  have  the  right  freely  to  navigate  Lake  Michigan 

•  Sh  their  vessels,  boats,  and  crafts,  so  long  as  the  privilege  ot 
Tv  gating  the  St.  Lawrence  should  be  en  oyed  by  Amenean  cit- 
hJm     And  now  let  us  see  how  these  reciprocal  privileges  com- 

X  as  to  results.  In  the  year  1857,  one  hundred  and  mne  Brit- 
F^  vessdB  cleared  from  the  sh.gle  port  of  Chicago,  on  Lake  Mi- 
cWn-freighted,  doubtless,  mainly  by  the  products  ot  our  grea 
S  Kro^^-ing  region  of  the  Northwest-to  the  great  dctnmen 
ff  our^iwn  ship  owners  and  carriers.  Thus,  it  will  be  seen  hat 
instead  of  receiving  any  benefits  from  the  privilege  ol  navigating 
■  the  St?  Lawrence,  "0  compensate  for  the  large  concessions  of  the 
tl^ary,  we  only  obtained  that  privilege  by  grantmg  a  similar  one 
to  British  subiects,  of  ten  times  its  value.  , 

•  I  object,  fuJther'more,  to  this  article  in  respect  to  the  navigation 
of  the  St.  Lawrence,  that,  by  receiving  it  as  a  favor,  lor  a  limi- 
ted period,  and  for  an  expressed  and  continuing  consideration 
we  vFreclude  ourselves  from  taking  the  higher  and  true  ground 
Tat  it  belongs  to  us  by  the  law  of  nat  ons.    That  is  a  position  we 
ought  never  to  yield.    We  occupied  it  in  respect  to  the  Missis- 
S,  when  LoJsiana  belonged  to  a  foreign  power.    It  is  the  1  osi- 
?  on  ^^  which  the  publicists  of  Europe  have  been  steadily  tending 
sinc/tl-e  treaties  of  1815,  which  terminated  the  g'ft^ars/)* 
Napoleon,  and  it  is  even  more  imperatively  demanded  by  the 
^.ll^^ul  nf  fi,ia  nnntinftnt.    We  are  insietmg  upon  it  at  this 


1 


u 


time  "In  the  interest  of  our  commerce  with  the  nations  upon  the 
vallies  of  the  great  rivers  of  South  America,  and  we  ought  not 
to  abandon  it  in  our  own  case,  as  the  occupants  of  a  part  of  tlie 
upper  valley  of  the  St.  Lawrence.  And  yet,  accepting  this  priv- 
ilege of  outlet  to  the  sea,  as  a  purchased  favor  under  this  treaty, 
why  are  we  not  estopped  from  claiming  it  as  our  right  under  the 
law  of  nations  ? 

Tlie  privilege  of  navigating  the  canals  of  Canada,  communica- 
ting between  the  great  lakes  and  the  ocean,  with  oar  vessels,  boats, 
and^rafts,  on  payment  of  the  same  tolls  as  are  charged  to  British 
subjects,  was  no  new  privilege  granted  by  the  treaty.  It  is  a  privi- 
lege which  we  had  enjoyed  before,  without  any  treaty  stipulation 
on  the  subject,  and  which  it  would  have  been  the  height  of  folly, 
on  the  part  of  the  Canadian  Government,  to  have  withdrawn  from 
us.  These  canals  were  built  for  the  purpose  of  drawing  the  trade 
of  our  western  States  to  the  ports  of  Montreal  and  Quebec,  and 
to  close  them  against  our  vessels,*would  not  only  defeat  the  object 
for  which  they  were  created,  but  diminish  the  revenues  derivable 
therefrom.  We  need  no  treaty  stipulations  to  protect  us  against  an 
act  so  suicidal.  And  yet  we  are  not  permitted  to  enjoy  tliis  privi- 
lege even,  in  the  true  spirit  in  which  it  was  granted.  By  a  regu- 
lation of  the  Canadian  Government,  wlicat,  flour,  and  corn,  pass- 
ing through  the  Weliund  canal,  only  twenty-eight  miles  in  length, 
are  charged  the  same  tolls  as  if  they  also  passed  through  all  the 
St.  Lawrence  canals  to  the  ocean.  These  articles  constitute  al- 
most the  entire  freight  of  our  vessels  passing  through  the  Wel- 
land  canal,  and  not  one  in  twenty  of  our  vessels  pass  through  any 
other  canal  but  that.  Although  this  regulation  applies  as  well  to 
British  vessels,  as  to  our  own,  yet- as  nearly  all  the  wheat,  flour, 
and  corn,  transported  by  the  AVellani  canal,  is  carried  by  Ameri- 
can vessels,  the  hardship  falls  almost  exclusively  upon  American 
interests.  The  regulation,  therefore,  practically  operates  as  an 
odious  discrimination  against  us. 

Mr.  Chainnan,  I  have  now  gone  through  with  my  indictment 
against  this  misnamed  "  Reciprocity  Treaty."  In  the  limited  time 
allotted  to  me,  I  have  only  been  able  to  arraign  it  upon  some  o^ 
its  most  glaring  enormities — nor  could  I  attempt  to  elabomte  an 
argument  upon  a  single  count  in  the  indictment.  The  treaty  is 
the'  parent  of  a  long  line  of  minor  evils,  which  have  either  si)rung 
directly  from  its  loins,  or  resulted  from  acts  of  the  Canadian  Par- 
liament, which  never  would  have  been  passed  if  the  treaty  had 
not  been  in  existence.  All  these  I  have  been  compelled  to  pass 
over  entirely. 

And  now,  sir,  having  shown  some  of  the  evils  of  this  treaty,  I 
come  to  the  important  question — what  is  the  appropriate  remedy 
for  them?  Must  we  quietly  submit  to  them  for  five  years  longer, 
and  then  merely  give  notice  that  we  desire  to  terminate  the  treaty 
at  the  end  of  anotlier  year?  Sir,  I  am  opposed  to  this  dilatory 
action.  I  would  strike  at  once  at  the  root  of  the  evil,  by  abro- 
gating the  treaty,  if  th.at  be  practicable ;  and  if  not,  I  would  lop 
oft'  its  branches  by  a  resort  to  every  kind  of  retaliatory  legisla- 
tion within  our  power. 


16 

But,  sir,  in  my  judgment  we  have  a  right  to  abrogate  this 
treaty  at  once.     It  has  been  persistently  violated  in  its  spirit    it 
not  in  its  letter,  by  the  Canadian  Government,  ever  since  the  day 
that  it  was  ratified.    Its  avowed  and  manifest  objects  have  been 
wholly  iierverted,  and  it  has  been  used  as  a  means  of  deteating 
and  utterly  abolishing  the  international  policy  which  it  was  in- 
tended to  foster  and  build  up.     For  years  betore  this    '.'e^vty  waB 
made,  the  IJritish  Government,  through  her  accredited  diplomatic 
agenta,  had  been  urging  upon  our  Government  the  importance 
0?  entering  into  some  arrangement  to  facilitate  trade  and  com- 
merce between  this  country  and  the  neighboring  British  colonies, 
for  the  mutual  and  reciprocal  benefit  of  th^  people  of  both  coun- 
tries.   That  the  treaty  was  intended  to  promote  trai  e  in  botli  ai- 
rections-to  increase 'the  sales  of  our  products  to  the  people  ot 
the  Britisli  colonies,  as  well  as  our  purchases  of  their  products,  is 
a  proposition  that  does  not  admit  of  a  doubt     lo  assume  that 
our  Government  would  have  entered  into  it  with  the  uiHlerstand- 
ing  that  it  was  to  be  the  foundation  of  a  policy  which  should  close 
tht  ports  of  the  British  colonies  against  all  the  products  o    this 
country  which  could  find  a  market  there,  while  admitting  all  the 
exportable  products  of  those  colonies  to  unrestricted  access  to  our 
markets,  would  be  to  assmne  that  our  Government  had  deliber- 
ately and  maliciously  conspired  against  the  niterests  ot  is  own 
citizens,  for  the  advantage  of  strancjers  and  aliens.    It  the  histoiy 
of  the  Negotiations  which  led  to  the  treaty  were  wholly  blotted 
out,  reason  and  common  sense  would  forbid  any  such  assumption. 
The  object  of  the  treaty  was  formally  declared,  m  the  preamble, 
to  be,  "  to  regulate  the  commerce  and  navigation  between  their 
respective  territories  and  people,  and  more  especially  between  her 
Maiesty's  possessions  in  North  America  and  the  Unued  btates, 
in  such  manmr  as  to  render  the  same  reciprocaUy  Imfcuil  and 
eatisfaetorur    Now,  sir,  when  a  treaty,  whose  objects  are  thus 
solemnly  declared  bv  its  own  language,  is  so  perver  ed  by  one 
party  as  to  utterly  defeat  those  objects,  and  produce  directly  op- 
posite results,  is  the  other  party  bound  to  adhere  to  it  i 

That  such  has  been  the  effect  of  the  legislation  of  the  Canadian 
Parliament,  since  the  ratification  of  the  treaty,  is  undeniable. 
Thev  have  not  only  annually  increased  their  imposts  upon  all 
the  productions  of  this  country  which  seek  their  markets,  but 
thev  have  so  modified  their  tariflf  laws  as  practically  to  discrimi- 
nate against  importations  from  this  country,  in  favor  ot  all  other 

^"^The  Tendency  of  their  legislation  has  been,  to  compel  the  peo- 
ple of  Oaneda"to  purchase  their  imports  from  any  other  country 
Spon  eartli,  in  preference  to  the  country  to  which  tliey  sell  their 
exports  •  '  effect  has  been,  a  rapid  decline  in  our  export  trade 
to  Canada,  e  or  since  the  ratification  of  the  treaty.  And  now, 
bv  their  late  tariff  act  of  1859,  they  have  increased  these  duties 
to  such  a  point,  as  must  henceforth  almost  anmhilatfe  our  export 
trade  to  tliat  country.  Sir,  had  the  Canadian  Parliament  a  right 
immediately  upon  the  ratification  of  the  treaty,  to  pass  a  law 
absolutely  prohibiting  all  importations  from  this  country,  except 


1- 


'""^BE^^^gf^K^'^S^SaaKa^^'^* 


of  the  articles  Bpecifiod  iu  the  treaty?  Can  anybody  doubt  that 
such  legislation  would  have  been  in  flagrant  violation  of  the 
treaty  i  Will  anybody  contend,  that  we  should  be  bound  by 
the  treaty  in  the  face  of  such  legislation  ?  And  if  Canada  could 
not,  consistently  with  the  treaty,  at  once  lay  an  absolute  embargo 
upon  importations  from  this  country,  can  she  gradually  effect 
the  sanie  result  by  increasing  her  imposts  from  year  to  year,  and 
go  modifying  her  tariff  laws  as  to  discriminate  against  us  ? 

Sir,  as  the  avowed  object  of  this  treaty  was,  according  to  its 
own  terms,  "  to  regulate  bommeree  and  navigation"  between  the 
two  countries  in  "  such  nianner  as  to  render  tno  same  reciprocally 
beneficial  and  satisfactory,"  any  act  by  either  party  tending  to 
prohibit  and  abolish  such  commerce,  is  not  only  a  violation  of 
the  spirit  of  the  treaty,  but  of  its  express  letter.  Wlien  the 
treaty,  setting  out  with  this  broad  and  liberal  declaration  of  its 
objects,  went  on  to  specify  certain  enumerated  articles  which 
ehoiild  be  admitted  into  each  country,  from  the  other,  entirely 
free  of  duty,  was  there  not  an  implied  agreement  that  articles  not 
specified  should  continue  to  be  aamitted  into  each  country  on  at 
least  as  favorable  terms  as  then  existed  ?  It  appears  to  me,  sir, 
that  any  other  construction  of  the  treaty  makes  it  an  instrument 
to  defeat  the  very  policy  and  objects,  which,  according  to  its  own 
terms,  it  was  intended  to  foster  and  promote, 

Mr.  Chairman,  no  one  holds  our  treaty  obligations  more  sacred 
than  I  do.  I  v/ould  perform,  with  scrupulous  fidelity,  all  our  in- 
ternational engagements,  without  stopping  to  weigh  the  advan- 
tages, so  long  as  good  faith  was  kept  towards  us  on  the  other  side- 
But  when  a  treaty,  imposing  mutual  obligations  and  duties,  is 
fereistenly  violated,  circumvented  and  perverted  by  one  party, 
hold  that  it  ceases  to  impose  obligations  on  the  other.  Iu 
such  a  case,  the  injured  party  has  a  two-fold  remedy.  It  can 
■  either  appeal  to  the  last  arbiter  of  nations,  to  compel  the  delin- 
quent party  to  perform  its  dutj,,  or  it  can  annul  the  treaty,  and 
drive  tne  other  party  to  offensive  measures,  if  she  does  not  choose 
to  submit.  Sir,  in  my  judgment,  this  choice  of  remedies  is  pre- 
sented to  us  in  respect  to  this  treaty.  If  the  treaty,  faithfully 
performed  on  both  sides,  would  enure  to  our  benefit,  it  rrllght  be 
policy  to  hold  the  other  party  to  its  strict  performance.  But  inas- 
much as  it  will  operate  to  our  disadvantage  in  any .  event,  I 
would  resort  to  the  other  remedy — annul  it,  and  take  the  conse- 

3uence8.  Entertaining  these  views,  it  is  my  intention,  at  an  early 
ay,  to  introduce  a  bul  to  repeal  the  act  of  August  5, 1854,  to 
carry  into  effect  thfe  provisions  of  this  treaty^  and  the  act  amenda- 
tory thereto,  approved  March  2d,  1865 — with  a  clause  declaring 
all  imports  from  the  British  North  American  Provinces,  subject 
to  the  same  duties  as  are  imposed  upon  imports  from  other 
countries. 


^*i 


.^ 


...  J 


